Mark Walker <furface@...> writes:
signed as gmail.com. I forward it to abuse and they don't claim it's
not them.
From a milter-greylist point of view, I have or try to have gmail
whitelisted, since they are real smtp servers and send significant ham.
To address the problem, I'm inclined to add a SA rule that adds a few
points for mail from gmail, hoping that real mail will BAYES_00 or user
whitelist down and spam will get pushed up over threshold. If I had
more gmail correspondents I'd be less inclined to do this.
> It's a problem because Google IPs are white listed by default on myI am getting a fair bit of spam from google, and it's usually DKIM
> system, and it could cause a problem blacklisting a Google server.
>
> I've received numerous messages over the last few days. I've tried
> sending big cos like Google and Yahoo complaints about spam in the
> past. They invariably send back denying the messages came from their
> servers. The following is Google, isn't it? I could be spacing it
> because it's early here in California.
>
> smtp-out3.google.com (smtp-out3.google.com [216.239.45.15])
signed as gmail.com. I forward it to abuse and they don't claim it's
not them.
From a milter-greylist point of view, I have or try to have gmail
whitelisted, since they are real smtp servers and send significant ham.
To address the problem, I'm inclined to add a SA rule that adds a few
points for mail from gmail, hoping that real mail will BAYES_00 or user
whitelist down and spam will get pushed up over threshold. If I had
more gmail correspondents I'd be less inclined to do this.